<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>RapidTax Blog &#187; trading</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rapidtax.com/blog/index.php/tag/trading/?feed=rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rapidtax.com/blog</link>
	<description>Tax news, personal finance, and more!</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 19:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>2008 Tax Return Conundrum: With Funding Dropping, How Will Feds Pick up the Slack?</title>
		<link>http://www.rapidtax.com/blog/index.php/2008-tax-return-conundrum-with-funding-dropping-how-will-feds-pick-up-the-slack/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rapidtax.com/blog/index.php/2008-tax-return-conundrum-with-funding-dropping-how-will-feds-pick-up-the-slack/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2009 19:32:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Tax News]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[irs]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[swiss banks]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[trading]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rapidtax.com/blog/?p=103</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[2008 tax return numbers just aren&#8217;t looking good for the government. Year over year revenue has dropped catastrophically, even as spending is up. So how are they making up the shortfall? There&#8217;s been some tentative talk of cost-cutting and income tax hikes, but there are some unusual plans that are also in the works:

Via Phillip [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>2008 tax return numbers just aren&#8217;t looking good for the government. Year over year revenue has <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/2009-05-26-irs-tax-revenue-down_N.htm">dropped catastrophically</a>, even as spending is up. So how are they making up the shortfall? There&#8217;s been some tentative talk of cost-cutting and income tax hikes, but there are some unusual plans that are also in the works:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/phillip/345829246/"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/160/345829246_a7434a76dc.jpg"></a><br />
<em>Via <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/phillip/">Phillip</a> on Flickr.</em><br />
<span id="more-103"></span><br />
<strong>Getting information from Swiss banks:</strong> even when they <a href="http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/ubs-tax-probe-expands-hong-kong/">aren&#8217;t in Switzerland</a>, these banks are feeling the heat. It may be the single best way to make up for a weak 2008 tax return: collect unpaid taxes on money earned during the good years, instead!</p>
<p><strong>Legalizing in order to tax:</strong> The <em>Washington Post</em> recently published an editorial calling for <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/16/AR2009081601758.html">legalizing and taxing drugs</a>. For a paper that values its connections to the political mainstream, that&#8217;s a significant step. Among other things, they argue that it&#8217;s a dollars-and-cents issue:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Having fought the war on drugs, we know that ending the drug war is the right thing to do &#8212; for all of us, especially taxpayers. While the financial benefits of drug legalization are not our main concern, they are substantial. In a July referendum, Oakland, Calif., voted to tax drug sales by a 4-to-1 margin. Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron estimates that ending the drug war would save $44 billion annually, with taxes bringing in an additional $33 billion.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Finding new things to illegalize and fine:</strong> High-Frequency Trading is a <a href="http://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2009/08/17/a-bestiary-of-algorithmic-trading-strategies/">fiendishly complex subject which is only partly understood, even by PhDs and industry experts</a>. Fortunately, the qualifications for having an opinion on it are a bit lower. One new proposal is a <a href="http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/KH19Dj01.html">tax on every trade</a> as a way to partly ban high-frequency trading.</p>
<p>So that&#8217;s the plan: tax money overseas, legalize drugs, and create a fine for something nobody really understands.</p>
<p>How much of this will really happen? The answer is, likely, almost none of it: overseas banks have always had to assume that there could be a crackdown, so they&#8217;ve taken precautions to make it hard to get money out. While drug legalization is getting more popular, it&#8217;s hard to beat the status quo. And a trading tax is not likely to get passed any time soon&mdash;if Wall Streeters are already paying income taxes, why kill the golden goose by cutting their incomes in order to tax them a different way?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rapidtax.com/blog/index.php/2008-tax-return-conundrum-with-funding-dropping-how-will-feds-pick-up-the-slack/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
